The Liverpool Club Thread. **No Spoilers**

[BaZ87]

I hope you're right because if Klopp signs nobody and then we go on a run of dropped points that ultimately causes us to fall behind City and lose the shot at the title, I can only foresee one person of blame by the masses for that.

For me, its a simple case of risk v reward. Signing someone to aid the defence, preferably an older player with premier league experience, can have no negative effects and only the possibility of a positive effect, whereas not signing anyone to aid the defence can have no positive effect and only the possibility of a negative effect. So in terms of risk v reward, I see no risk in buying someone but the possibility of reward, and of not buying someone, the risk of losing the reward. I certainly wont grumble if we sign someone but to be honest, I may well grumble if we don't and suddenly end up 4 points behind City instead of in front.

So dropping points will directly be down to not signing Steven Caulker? Your argument seems to be it's best too have too many than not enough and within reason that's fine but where do you draw a line? Why not sign 3 CB's just in case. From what you've said there's no risk in that and only a possibility of a reward.

Had Matip not already been back and Lovren not fit again by our next game and Gomez not fit by the game after then fair enough, sign somebody just in case but I honestly don't see how signing somebody like Steven Caulker will benefit us in any way shape or form. We've already been incredibly unlucky and still he wouldn't feature - it would take at least 2 more injuries in the next week before he would. You can't sign somebody on that basis or you may as well have a 40 man squad. Now if we do end up getting 2 injuries in the next few days and we end up dropping points directly as a result of playing a 16 year old at CB then you can maybe blame the manager.

And while you say there's no risk in signing somebody, I'm sure you did or would have said the same last summer. What if signing a CB last summer meant we couldn't then sign VVD in January? Spending money on players the club do not want is a risk, if not the sort of risk you think about.

 

[Tombstone]

So dropping points will directly be down to not signing Steven Caulker? Your argument seems to be it's best too have too many than not enough and within reason that's fine but where do you draw a line? Why not sign 3 CB's just in case. From what you've said there's no risk in that and only a possibility of a reward.

Had Matip not already been back and Lovren not fit again by our next game and Gomez not fit by the game after then fair enough, sign somebody just in case but I honestly don't see how signing somebody like Steven Caulker will benefit us in any way shape or form. We've already been incredibly unlucky and still he wouldn't feature - it would take at least 2 more injuries in the next week before he would. You can't sign somebody on that basis or you may as well have a 40 man squad. Now if we do end up getting 2 injuries in the next few days and we end up dropping points directly as a result of playing a 16 year old at CB then you can maybe blame the manager.

And while you say there's no risk in signing somebody, I'm sure you did or would have said the same last summer. What if signing a CB last summer meant we couldn't then sign VVD in January? Spending money on players the club do not want is a risk, if not the sort of risk you think about.

Well to be fair, I would never have opted to sign Caulkner anyway as bandaging a wound with a crappy piece of dirty denim isn't as much use as bandaging it with a clean piece of cloth. At his best he was never good enough.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that we should rush out and buy half a dozen defenders, its not about having too many, its about having enough. We don't need loads of defenders but imo , we absolutely do need more cover. Like I say, I hope you are right. I equally hope that nobody who thinks we should not sign anyone then later blames Klopp for not signing anyone IF we end up dropping points. I understand the risks of spending money but if we aren't able to take a £20m risk (arbitrary figure) to help with a title push then we need to stop considering ourselves to be a big club right now. As I say though, I am very much a risk v reward person, which is probably one of the very many reasons that I sit on a PC forum talking about football management rather than actually doing it

 

[chroniclard]

Gary Cahill is just kicking his heels at Chelsea.

 

[BaZ87]

Well to be fair, I would never have opted to sign Caulkner anyway as bandaging a wound with a crappy piece of dirty denim isn't as much use as bandaging it with a clean piece of cloth. At his best he was never good enough.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that we should rush out and buy half a dozen defenders, its not about having too many, its about having enough. We don't need loads of defenders but imo , we absolutely do need more cover. Like I say, I hope you are right. I equally hope that nobody who thinks we should not sign anyone then later blames Klopp for not signing anyone IF we end up dropping points. I understand the risks of spending money but if we aren't able to take a £20m risk (arbitrary figure) to help with a title push then we need to stop considering ourselves to be a big club right now. As I say though, I am very much a risk v reward person, which is probably one of the very many reasons that I sit on a PC forum talking about football management rather than actually doing it

If we're not talking about another Caulker then there quite clearly is a risk. Signing somebody that would have any use to us is likely to cost a fair bit of money - using your £20m example, throw in a 4 year contract and all other fees around a transfer and you're committing £40m. Unless there's a very obvious need then do you really want to committ that money? As I said, had we done that last summer that may have meant not VVD now.

We're clearly not in an ideal situation but we've got enough options and players due to return very soon that we're not massively desperate. Certainly not desperate enough to sign somebody that isn't considered a long-term solution imo.

 

[Tombstone]

We're clearly not in an ideal situation but we've got enough options and players due to return very soon that we're not massively desperate. Certainly not desperate enough to sign somebody that isn't considered a long-term solution imo.

Lets hope you are right, I guess we will know over the course of the next few matches whether or not we were desperate enough. I've waited 29 years to see us lift the title again, hell I was back in college the last time we won it, so I am maybe a little bit jittery. I'm just hoping that I'm not sat here in a months time looking back with hindsight and thinking if only.

 

[MissChief]

Apparently Ki Jana Hoever got sent off in a development game the other day but Liverpool are considering an appeal. He didn't look out of place in the FA Cup when he came on so he could feature.

 

[omnomnom]

He was sent off but it doesn't effect senior games.

 

[BaZ87]

Regardless of any suspension, I can't see him playing CB in a PL game. He's not physically ready and Klopp already hinted that he was going to pick Henderson alongside Fabinho in the Wolves game before Hendo picked up a small knock. If he were to feature it would be at RB I'd imagine.

 

[BaZ87]

All the Liverpool press pack are reporting that Robertson has agreed a new 5 and a half year contract. For all the praise other signings have got, at £9m he's got to be right up there with the best signings we've made in recent history and I don't think it's a stretch to say he's the best LB in the League.

 

[Random Guy Esq.]

Great news!

 

[Tombstone]

All the Liverpool press pack are reporting that Robertson has agreed a new 5 and a half year contract. For all the praise other signings have got, at £9m he's got to be right up there with the best signings we've made in recent history and I don't think it's a stretch to say he's the best LB in the League.

Was never really any doubt that he would sign a newly offered contract. Absolutely agree, for the money we paid for him and the sheer quality (and consistent quality at that, hard to think of any match where his performance has been under a 7/10), for that 9m, he has definitely been one of the best value signings for years and years. Whats more, he is proof that you dont need to scout the big teams and pay the big bucks in order to get someone top class.

 

[Pigeon_Killer]

Early days, but I can't remember us having a better left back. I was too young to remember much about Kennedy but I can't think of anyone since that's been so consistently good.

 

[sneakysnail]

Early days, but I can't remember us having a better left back. I was too young to remember much about Kennedy but I can't think of anyone since that's been so consistently good.

The best LB since Riise for sure. I'll always love Riise for the wonder goals so it kinda inflates my opinion of him. week in and out he probably wasnt as good as Robertson.

 

[omnomnom]

Risse wasnt very good lol.

Good news. Seems like a top lad aswell.

 

[Mark1989]

Early days, but I can't remember us having a better left back. I was too young to remember much about Kennedy but I can't think of anyone since that's been so consistently good.

Aurelio was great when fit, but do feel Robertson is best one since risse

 

[BaZ87]

We are taking the **** with this Riise talk, aren't we? Riise was bang average, at best - the best thing you can say is that he was better than Moreno and Konchesky. Aurelio was very good but never fit but Robertson has been outstanding and by far our best LB in my living memory.

Anyway more good news, Trent's signed a new deal too - the long-term state of our squad is looking very positive with all our key players tied down for the best years of their careers. And a bit more good news, it looks like Trent's injury isn't as bad as first thought - Klopp said in his press-conference yesterday he's very close to being available today. Supposedly Klopp was being a bit economical with the truth and he won't play today however he has a real chance of being back vs Leicester.

 

[Tombstone]

Robertson is the best left back we've had since Steve Staunton, actually I think the two play in a quite similar style.

 

[Rotty]

We are taking the **** with this Riise talk, aren't we? Riise was bang average, at best .

 

[shine]

We are taking the **** with this Riise talk, aren't we? Riise was bang average, at best - the best thing you can say is that he was better than Moreno and Konchesky. Aurelio was very good but never fit but Robertson has been outstanding and by far our best LB in my living memory.

That's harsh, Riise was good going forward and I'll never forget his rocket against Bartez. We were in the Anfield Road end for that game and as soon as hit it we were all up celebrating. However, there's no question Robertson is a better defender and overall a better player.

 

[BaZ87]

I'll admit I do have an irrational dislike of Riise but nobody is convincing me that he was any better than average. He lived off that free-kick and a few other goals for far too long. Defensively he was far from great and while he had a mean shot on him, his attacking contributions in terms of build-up play, foward passes and crosses were non existent. Aurelio was far better than him but couldn't stay fit and Robertson's even better defensively than Aurelio and while he doesn't quite have the left foot that Aurelio had, it's not far off and he throws in super human running power and energy levels too.